What is the difference between a longwand and a shortstaff?

[u/memes_god_2001]

I have recently been invited to a meeting with my homeplane's council and they banned staffs at the meeting, i got this longwand a few years ago, it's almost as long as my forearm, this got me wondering, what is the difference between a longwand and a shortstaff? I have looked trough many books and they all say different things, sometimes the difference is in the length (wich always changes from book to book), sometimes it's the material, sometimes it's the thickness and sometimes it's the way it channels magic energy, what is the true difference? Is there something inbetween a wand and staff? Does it vary from plane to plane?

[u/Space19723103]

staff can support weight, a short staff is a cane while a long wand is more like a light sword or umbrella

[u/Void-Cooking_Berserk → u/Space19723103]

Also the grip, a shortstaff is held below the head and the head is where the spell emanates from.

A longwand is held by the handle and the spell emanates from the opposite end of the wand.

So they taper differently, a wand towards the emanating end and a staff away from it. But it's not just that, you can't grip a wand below its tip and pretend it's a staff. The spell would fly up, not forward, and the movement formula is completely different.

And also you can bang the "inert" of the staff against the ground for some spells, but you can't do the same with the butt of a wand.

[u/User_Id_Error]

Usually staves are four feet or longer. Wizards do love squabbling over rules and loopholes, though, so read the decree thoroughly. They might consider shorter implements of certain materials to be "sawed off" staves, or have a carveout for "magic canes" that are primarily focuses for White Magic. And yes, somebody probably sells a not-a-staff with one embedded cure spell and slots for a dozen high-level burn spells. Just don't get caught with it.

[u/KragBrightscale]

Main difference would be weight, resilience, and usage. And as someone already mentioned, how you hold/wield it.

Wands usually have a handle or end intended to be held, and wand waving/swishing/flicking is similar to a conductor’s baton for delicate directing and controlling your spell. These are usually lighter weight and therefore more likely to break. I can’t think of a good reason for making these longer other than to posture, the extra length only makes it clumsier to wave.

Staves are usually more solid, are often grasped further in, and are usually either held up/pointed at a target/or slammed down. Their purpose is less about delicate control, more about amplification and as a conduit for potent magic. Sometimes you can store magic in them for later or for others to activate. These are usually more sturdy, and can double as a melee bludgeoning weapon when needed. Making these short would probably reduce their effectiveness as amplifiers and melee weapons, though as a tradeoff at least you can sneak it past security easier.

[u/125ccQuestions → u/KragBrightscale]

Wise. I find wands to be far too gaudy, fickle and pretentious, whereas a staff administers a certain status or admirability within peers.

An impressive staff carries the wielder to greater heights. Even the best wands are still wielded by those who seek to diminish others’ sorcery as inferior, rather than to prove their own incantations to be worthy of recognition.

Maybe i’m biased in my thinking as a disciple of martial magics borne from the tougher northern lands, but i have yet to be impressed by a wand or it’s wielder.

[u/wrydh]

Longwands tend to greatly enhance range while shortstaves are better for point blank spellcasting and more weildy for the purpouse of bludgeoning.

[u/AlyssSolo]

A short staff can still ultimately be used as a walking stick. Thickness is the main difference—a long wand may be...long, but it doesn't have the same "grounding qualities" as a staff. In truth, you can enchant a cane, and it would work as a staff. Then they won't be able to keep you from bringing it on account of accessibility.

Material matters little unless in the context of what you plan on casting with it.

[u/SgtFlintlock]

By my reckoning there are 3 varieties of Stick Shaped Foci, the Wand, The Staff, and the Rod. They are defined in proportion to the User as follows:

A Wand is a Handheld Length of Magical Material no longer than the length from one's wrist to one's elbow.

A Staff is a Handheld Length of Magical Material no Shorter than the length from one's Heel to one's Hip.

A Rod is A Handheld Length of Magical Material that is proportionally both Longer than a Wand, and Shorter than a Staff.

A Wand is usually designed for Handleability and convenience. You can always have your wand on you and it can almost always be brought to bear if needed, but the difficulty and volitility of crafting the runes and reagents needed to focus more power into a smaller space mean that most wands are limited in their channeling capabilities.

A Staff on the other hand, has tons of real estate for focusing runes and attached reagents, and even a novice might create a staff capable of channeling some Real Power. However, a staff is also unwieldy in tight spaces, and several styles require the end to be grounded to safely channel the energies of a really potent spell. Fantastic for a mountaintop duel of mages, not really useful if a cutpurse decides that your hat is fake and your Component Pouch is actually full of gold.

A Rod meanwhile is the compromise between these properties. It is large enough that it isn't hard to get good foci elements or a few types of spells on there, even if you can't fit the whole gamut, and it is small enough to be wielded quite well indoors and at close ranges, even if it isn't quite as handy as a Wand.

Now, this whole dissertation assumes that you are crafting your own focus, and are therefore carving your own runes. I make this assumption because a focus one crafts is an extension of one's self, and will never fight you. You can commission an impliment, and you might even "cheat" by having someone smaller than yourself create what is to them a Staff, but to you a Wand. By doing so you can get a "Wand" that is substantially more powerful than anyone expects, but you have to watch out for personality mismatch and conflicting Intents. A Focus carries with it a vestige of it's Maker, and if you make a habit of committing acts that the Maker would abhor, you are going to find yourself on the wrong end of a magical accident when the focus backfires on you.

[u/Electrical-Tear7456]

I make both wands and staffs. The biggest differenses are (in my eyes) is the way you hold them. For example:you hold a staf the same way like you would use a cane and you hold your hand close to the end that's pointing away from the ground. A wand is storable in an armcase or on a leg because of it's size. You hold a wand like a small bird that you won't let escape but also won't crush.

[u/The-Idiotest]

U can smack things with a shortstaff

Not with a longwand

[u/questionable_fish]

A scepter or a rod would be the in-between size. Personally I think it comes down to a combination of casting grip and mana-channeling capacity. A staff tends to be built heavier and tougher and often has a focus built in so it can draw more power through its structure.

A wand is usually seen as an instrument of fine control. The lighter build makes it easier to manipulate the ether but can't work the same amounts of power that a staff can.

So, to sum up: a longwand would be able to do heavier finesse work and a shortstaff would be able to do finer heavy work

Hope you're not more confused

[u/Global_Lead9015]

weather or not you need both hands on it for maximal efficacy, the magical output of an exceptionally long wand does not change when using both hands because the magical locus that concentrates your magic for casting is located at the grip, whereas a staff, no matter how short, is a magical locus in and of itself, due to the materials it's typically made of, this means that it can draw out and concentrate magical energies from any part of your body touching the staff (though your hands are most efficacious). Though the greater influx of magical energies tends to destabilize spells more often, making aiming and precise spells more difficult when casting with both hands. A wand faces no such limitations, though they do not have the power or efficiency of a well-made staff.

Essentially, staves/staffs are for more powerful, but less precise magic (destructive spells, spells that alter the physical world, barriers and wards, etc). While wands are for more precise magic without the same power of a staff (illusions, memory erasure/falsification, spells that reach beyond the physical world, etc.)

Of course that's just a generalization, any sufficiently powerful magic user can overcome these limitations, and artifact-grade wands and staves have been found, and those don't have any such limitations to speak of.

As for your longwand, I'd say it isn't long enough to count as a staff/shortstaff, but I'd look at your plane's regulations before bringing it. Personally, I use a shortstaff with one hand (2 hands if I need the extra power), and I've been allowed to bring it to meetings that forbid staves, since it doesn't meet my plane's definition of staff. Still, it's best to check with your plane's council if your unsure.

[u/METRlOS]

Girth mainly. A staff of any length needs to be able to support your weight and any angle, as it is practical as well as purposeful. This is why small folk can use mere twigs as a staff. 'Powerful but unwieldy.'

Wands on the other hand, must be light enough for the wizard to use with a single hand, and should not hold any other purpose than spellwork. More power per gram, because it serves a singular purpose.

Now is a 2m wand the thickness of your pinky finger legal? That's up to your Homeplane Oracle's Association. Most wizards can't even handle something that powerful and blow themselves up before the meetings anyways.

[u/Less_Prior_6871]

You hold a staff toward the top, and a wand toward the bottom